Robin Simpson and English student have both given good answers to your question.
There is a third way, argued by the logical positivists in the second quarter of the last century. According to philosophers like AJ Ayer, claims that attribute meaning to life are category errors. They decline to assert or deny that life is meaning. Meaning is a property of signs and language. ‘Life’ has a meaning only as a word looked up in a dictionary.
We can, in a metaphorical sort of way talk about a particular person’s life as being happy, unsuccessful, even without purpose. But in those cases all we are saying is that the person was happy for most of the time, or as often as not failed to achieve his/her aims, or was idle and passive. But the happiness, lack of success or of purpose was a property of the person not of an entity called ‘life’.
This has nothing to do with nihilism, agnosticism or atheism (although logical positivists find it very difficult to believe in divine beings). There is nothing depressing or despairing about it. They saw/see themselves as doing no more than pointing out a human blunder, leading, as often as not, to anxiety and disappointment.
The bird singing outside my window is enough. It does not need something called ‘meaning’ to give me delight. And the delight itself does not need meaning in order to be significant. It is enough for now.